weekend24uk wrote:t36 wrote:Dopey wrote:Their for private use not commercial use. besides it's not as if there are any other stations called radio 1 that can use them for their own news
I agree. But the reason Music 4 started putting that copyright woman over everything is because years ago, foreign stations started downloading the mp3s and using music on their own station! It's also not that hard for, say, a student station to download the Newsbeat mp3s, chop of the Radio 1 bits and use the music bed!
But that's not the reason I'm moaning - it's the fact that whenever clean stuff like this crops up, it has been released from the station somehow. And because the 2004 Newsbeat beats are in-house, it's definitely from the BBC. Whenever it is then uploaded like this, people take notice, and it's very easy for the person responsible to be told off by their employer because they shouldn't be in the public domain.
That's all I'm saying - it may all seem innocent, and it mostly is, but you have to think about the possible consequences. That's why it's best to keep stuff quiet and pass it on privately instead of uploading it.
That's all I'm a saying.
That isn't what i meant, i was talking about how ppl created a SoundPak.
And how do you think soundpaks are created?
Secondly, the Newsbeat into bed is slightly different to the one used on air if u must know
I'm well aware of that. Doesn't mean they're not from the same source as all the other Newsbeat jingles in the package, does it?
if its such a porblem to you i suggest that not download the beds anyway because we can't have your concious being hurt just because of a little copyright ambiguity...
What are you on about? I don't need to download the beds!
I'm not talking about my conscience, I'm talking about the bloke who got hold of the music in the first place and passed it on privately - and then found out that somebody uploaded it to here! Think about what his employers will say to him when stuff like this becomes public.
Most importantly is that these are in the domain and we should thank who ever was responsible for their services.
You really have no idea. The beds have been passed on from person to person privately, until Mr F made them public. And I'm saying that it's not such a good idea because the person who released them in the first place is now in a slightly dangerous position because the beds are not SUPPOSED to be in the public domain.
Now I personally don't care who has them - but I'm sure the guy responsible is now a bit annoyed that someone who received the beds broke their promise and made them public.
AND really, the person who did release then probs new exactly what was gonna happen.
Errrrr... no. Because the beds were distributed among media professionals privately. I don't think that person thought somebody would then break an agreement and post them on chrismoyles.net, do you?
So t36, chill out and just relax a little ok?
Firstly, as I've said, if I was personally that annoyed, I'd take it further. I've got far bigger things to worry about than this website.
Secondly, instead of telling me to chill out and relax, why don't you think about the bigger picture. The reason stuff like this should be kept quiet is because - right or wrong - the BBC does not want stuff like this public. And now that Matt F has uploaded the audio instead of distributing it privately, the BBC may take notice. And because those three particular files are together, it is possible to trace the person responsible. Put 2 and 2 together and you will see that that person is now identifiable, and has broken terms of his employment. All because one person in the chain decided to upload stuff to this website.
Think about it instead of seeing me as some misery who doesn't like copyright infringement. It's nothing to do with copyright.
chrismoyles.net
